Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Oral Investigations
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations 5/2019

01-05-2019 | Original Article

Comparison of linear and volumetric measurements obtained from periodontal defects by using cone beam-CT and micro-CT: an in vitro study

Authors: M. Ayşe Tayman, Kıvanç Kamburoğlu, Özlem Küçük, Funda S. Ö. Ateş, Meral Günhan

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 5/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To assess linear and volumetric measurement accuracy of periodontal defects (class 2 furcation, fenestration, dehiscence, and three-wall intrabony defect) by using CBCT and micro-CT images obtained at different voxel sizes.

Material and methods

We created 66 periodontal defects in human dry mandibles. Images of teeth with defects were taken by Planmeca Promox 3D Max (CBCT) at voxel sizes of 0.2 and 0.075 mm and super-argus PET/CT (micro-CT) at voxel sizes of 0.12 and 0.06 mm. All defects were then linearly (depth, width, and height) and volumetrically measured by 3D-DOCTOR software. Differences between voxels were assessed by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Bland-Altman limits of agreement and ICCs were calculated to assess agreement between the methods. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Volumes measured by micro-CT (0.12–0.06 mm) were higher than those of CBCT (0.2–0.075 mm) measurements regardless of the voxel size. ICC between micro CT and CBCT methods was found to be statistically significant for all types of defects in terms of volume (p < 0.001), height (p < 0.05), width (p < 0.001), and depth measurements (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

CBCT provides useful information regarding linear and volumetric measurement of periodontal defects in vitro.

Clinical relevance

Size and volume of periodontal defects may play an important role in the determination of the most appropriate treatment plan and disease prognosis along with outcome assessment.
Literature
1.
Goldman HM, Cohen DW (1958) The intrabony pocket: classification and treatment. J Periodontol 29:272–291CrossRef
2.
Glickman I (1953) Clinical periodontology, Philadelphia, Saunders
3.
Papapanou PN, Wennström JL, Grondahl K (1988) Periodontal status in relation to age and tooth type: a cross-sectional radiographic study. J Clin Periodontol 15:469–478CrossRefPubMed
4.
Taba MJR, Kinney J, Kim AS, Giannobile WV (2005) Diagnostic biomarkers for oral and periodontal diseases. Dent Clin N Am 49:551–571CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
Corbet EF, HO DK, Lai SM (2009) Radiographs in periodontal disease diagnosis and management. Aust Dent J 54(Suppl 1):S27–S43CrossRefPubMed
7.
Braun X, Ritter L, Jervøe-storm PM, Frentzen M (2014) Diagnostic accuracy of CBCT for periodontal lesions. Clin Oral Investig 18:1229–1236CrossRefPubMed
8.
Mengel R, Candir M, Shiratori K, Flores-de-jacoby L (2005) Digital volume tomography in the diagnosis of periodontal defects: an in vitro study on native pig and human mandibles. J Periodontol 76:665–673CrossRefPubMed
9.
Misch KA, Yi ES, Sarment DP (2006) Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography for periodontal defect measurements. J Periodontol 77:1261–1266CrossRefPubMed
10.
Noujeim M, Prihoda TJ, Langlais R, Nummikoski P (2009) Evaluation of high-resolution cone beam computed tomography in the detection of simulated interradicular bone lesions. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38:156–162CrossRefPubMed
11.
Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Yang J (2007) Diagnostic validity (or acuity) of 2D CCD versus 3D CBCT-images for assessing periodontal breakdown. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 104:395–401CrossRefPubMed
12.
Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Yang J (2008) Detection of periodontal bone loss using digital intraoral and cone beam computed tomography images: an in vitro assessment of bony and / or infrabony defects. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:252–260CrossRefPubMed
13.
Molander B, Ahlqwist M, Gröndahl HG (1995) Panoramic and restrictive intraoral radiography in comprehensive oral radiographic diagnosis. Eur J Oral Sci 103:191–198CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ritman EL, Kinsey H, Robb RA, Gilbert BK, Haris LD (1980) Three-dimensional imaging of heart, lungs, and circulation. Science 210:273–280CrossRefPubMed
15.
Tetradis S, Anstey P, Graff-radford S (2010) Cone beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of dental disease. J Calif Dent Assoc 38:27–32PubMed
16.
Kamburoglu K, Murat S, Kolsuz E, Kurt H, Yuksel S, Paksoy C (2011) Comparative assessment of subjective image quality of crosssectional cone-beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Sci 53:501–508CrossRefPubMed
17.
Al-Rawi B, Hassan B, Vandenberge B, Jacobs R (2010) Accuracy assessment of three-dimensional surface reconstructions of teeth from cone beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Rehabil 37:352–358CrossRefPubMed
18.
Patcas R, Muller L, Ullrich O, Peltomaki T (2012) Accuracy of conebeam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 141:41–50CrossRef
19.
Hirsch E, Wolf U, Heinicke F, Silva MA (2008) Dosimetry of the cone beam computed tomography Veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo in different fields of view. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:268–273CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Bjorndal L, Carlsen O, Thuesen G, Darvann T, Kreiborg S (1999) External and internal macromorphology in 3D-reconstructed maxillary molars using computerized X-ray microtomography. Int Endod J 32:3–9CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kurt MH, Orhan K (2016) Diş Hekimliğinde Mikro-Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Kullanımı Turkiye Klinikleri. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol-Special Topics 2:14–21
23.
Anderson P, Elliott JC, Bose U, Jones SJ (1996) A comparison of the mineral content of enamel and dentine in human premolars and enamel pearls measured by X-ray microtomography. Arch Oral Biol 41:281–290CrossRefPubMed
24.
Rasperini G, Pilipchuk SP, Flanagan CL, Park CH, Pagni G, Hollister SJ, Giannobile WV (2015) 3D-printed Bioresorbable scaffold for periodontal repair. J Dent Res 94(9 Suppl):153S–157SCrossRefPubMed
25.
Wenzel A, Haiter-neto F, Frydenberg M, Kirkevang LL (2009) Variableresolution cone-beam computerized tomography with enhancement filtration compared with intraoral photostimulable phosphor radiography in detection of transverse root fractures in an in vitro model. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 108:939–945CrossRefPubMed
26.
Melo SL, Bortoluzzi EA, Abreu M Jr, Correa LR, Correa M (2010) Diagnostic ability of a cone-beam computed tomography scan to assess longitudinal root fractures in prosthetically treated teeth. J Endod 36:1879–1882CrossRefPubMed
27.
Ozer SY (2011) Detection of vertical root fractures by using cone beam computed tomography with variable voxel sizes in an in vitro model. J Endod 37:75–79CrossRefPubMed
28.
DA Silveira PF, Vizzottomb LGS, DA Silveira HL, Montagner F, DA Silveira HE (2013) Detection of vertical root fractures by conventional radiographic examination and cone beam computed tomography— an in vitro analysis. Dent Traumatol 29:41–46CrossRefPubMed
29.
Dalili Z, Taramsari M, Mousavi Mehr SZ, Salamat F (2012) Diagnostic value of two modes of cone-beam computed tomography in evaluation of simulated external root resorption: an in vitro study. Imaging Sci Dent 42:19–24CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Kamburoglu K, Kursun S (2010) A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT images of different voxel resolutions used to detect simulated small internal resorption cavities. Int Endod J 43:798–807CrossRefPubMed
31.
Bauman R, Scarfe W, Clark S, Morelli J, Scheetz J, Farman A (2011) Ex vivo detection of mesiobuccal canals in maxillary molars using CBCT at four different isotropic voxel dimensions. Int Endod J 44:752–758CrossRefPubMed
32.
Maret D, Telmon N, Peters OA, Lepage B, Treil J, Inglèse JM, Peyre A, Kahn JL, Sixou M (2012) Effect of voxel size on accuracy of 3D reconstructions with cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 41:649–655CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Damstra J, Fourie Z, Huddleston Slater JJ, Ren Y (2010) Accuracy of linear measurements from cone-beam computed tomographyderived surface models of different voxel sizes. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 137:16–17CrossRef
34.
Sun Z, Smith T, Kortam S, Kim DG, Tee BC, Fields H (2011) Effect of bone thickness on alveolar bone-height measurements from cone beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 139:117–127CrossRef
35.
Torres MG, Campos PS, Segundo NP, Navarrom M, Crusoe-Rebello I (2012) Accuracy of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography with different voxel sizes. Implant Dent 21:150–155CrossRefPubMed
36.
Sherrard JF, Rossouw PE, Benson BW, Carrillo R, Buschang PH (2010) Accuracy and reliability of tooth and root lengths measured on cone-beam computed tomographs. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 137:100–108CrossRef
37.
Grimard BA, Hoidal MJ, Mills MP, Mellonig JT, Nummikoski PV, Mealey BL (2009) Comparison of clinical, periapical radiograph, and cone-beam volume tomography measurement techniques for assessing bone level changes following regenerative periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 80:48–55CrossRefPubMed
38.
Leung CC, Palomo L, Griffith R, Hans MG (2010) Accuracy and reliability of cone-beam computed tomography for measuring alveolar bone height and detecting bony dehiscences and fenestrations. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 137:S109–S119CrossRef
39.
Ferrare N, Leite AF, Caracas HC, DE Azevedo RB, DE Melo NS, DE Souza Figueiredo PT (2013) Cone-beam computed tomography and microtomography for alveolar bone measurements. Surg Radiol Anat 35:495–502CrossRefPubMed
40.
Raichur PS, Setty SB, Thakur SL, Naikmasur VG (2012) Comparison of radiovisiography and digital volume tomography to direct surgical measurements in the detection of infrabony defects. J Clin Exp Dent 4:e43–e47CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Qiao J, Wang S, Duan J, Zhang Y, Qiu Y, Sun C, Liu D (2014) The accuracy of conebeam computed tomography in assessing maxillary molar furcation involvement. J Clin Periodontol 41:269–274CrossRefPubMed
42.
Walter C, Weiger R, Zitzmann NU (2010) Accuracy of three-dimensional imaging in assessing maxillary molar furcation involvement. J Clin Periodontol 37:436–441CrossRefPubMed
43.
Darby I, Sanelli M, Shan S, Silver J, Singh A, Soedjono M, Ngo L (2015) Comparison of clinical and cone beam computed tomography measurements to diagnose furcation involvement. Int J Dent Hyg 13:241–245CrossRefPubMed
44.
Horner K, Islam M, FLYgare L, Tsiklakis K, Whaites E (2009) Basic principles for use of dental cone beam computed tomography: consensus guidelines of the European academy of dental and maxillofacial radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38:187–195CrossRefPubMed
45.
Carter L, Farman AG, Geist J, Scarfe WC, Angelopoulos C, Nair MK, Hildebolt CF, Tyndall D, Shrout M (2008) American Academy of Oral and maxillofacial radiology. American Academy of Oral and maxillofacial radiology executive opinion statement on performing and interpreting diagnostic cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 106:561–562CrossRefPubMed
46.
47.
Pauwels R, Beinsberger J, Collaert B, Theodorakou C, Rogers J, Walker A et al (2012) Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners. Eur J Radiol 81:267–271CrossRefPubMed
48.
Granlund C, Thilander-Klang A, Ilhan B, Lofthag-Hansen S, Ekestubbe A (2016) Absorbedorgan and effective doses from digital intra-oral and panoramic radiography applyingthe ICRP 103 recommendations for effective dose estimations. Br J Radiol 89:20151052CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
49.
du Bois AH, Kardachi B, Bartold PM (2012) Is there a role for the use of volumetric cone beam computed tomography in periodontics? Aust Dent J 57(Suppl 1):103–108CrossRefPubMed
50.
Metadata
Title
Comparison of linear and volumetric measurements obtained from periodontal defects by using cone beam-CT and micro-CT: an in vitro study
Authors
M. Ayşe Tayman
Kıvanç Kamburoğlu
Özlem Küçük
Funda S. Ö. Ateş
Meral Günhan
Publication date
01-05-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2665-x

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

Clinical Oral Investigations 5/2019 Go to the issue

Original Article

Tooth crown discoloration induced by endodontic sealers: a 3-year ex vivo evaluation

Original Article

Stress distribution in mandibular donor site after harvesting bone grafts of various sizes from the ascending ramus of a dentate mandible by finite element analysis

Original Article

Distances of root apices to adjacent anatomical structures in the anterior maxilla: an analysis using cone beam computed tomography

Original Article

Comparing the outcomes of gold-standard dental examinations with photographic screening by mid-level dental providers

Original Article

Prevalence of degenerative joint disease of the temporomandibular joint: a systematic review

Original Article

Microflora of normal maxillary sinuses: does it justify perioperative antibiotic treatment in sinus augmentation procedures